MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409908023 · doi:10.1093/bioadv/vbaf103

Assessing accuracy and specificity of faecal source library for microbial source-tracking, using SourceTracker as case study

2024· article· en· W4409908023 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics Advances · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFecal contamination and water quality
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersMelbourne Water
KeywordsSource trackingOpen sourceTracking (education)Computer sciencePsychologyWorld Wide WebSoftware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motivation: Understanding the quality of the source library prior to undertaking library-dependent microbial source-tracking (MST) is an essential, but often overlooked, primary analysis step. Results: We propose an assessment approach to validate the quality of amplicon-derived faecal source libraries. This approach was demonstrated on a faecal source library consisting of 16S rRNA paired-end amplicon sequences, obtained from various animal types in Victoria, Australia. First, a leave-one-out (LOO) analysis was performed to assess the accuracy of source category groupings by identifying the number of samples incorrectly assigned to a different source category (i.e. animal type). Following a quality control procedure to decide retaining/removing/grouping incorrectly assigned samples, we then assessed if the sample sizes for each source type were sufficient to properly characterize the source fingerprints. Results from LOO demonstrated 15.5% of samples were incorrectly assigned, with high error rates in birds and wallabies within our source library. Increasing the sample size improved source identification accuracy. However, accuracy eventually plateaued in a source-specific manner. Importantly, this highlights the importance of conducting thorough assessments to understand the quality and limitations of the source library prior to library-dependent MST applications. Availability and implementation: QIIME2 is available via https://qiime2.org/; SourceTracker v2.0.1 is available via https://github.com/caporaso-lab/sourcetracker2; Pipeline for LOO is available via https://github.com/MonashOWL/Bioinformatics-IlluminaMGI/tree/main/16S/LOO; Pipeline for sample size assessment is available via https://github.com/MonashOWL/Bioinformatics-IlluminaMGI/tree/main/16S/Source%20variability.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score0.559

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it